| General > General Technical Chat |
| 'Master' and 'slave': Tech terms face scrutiny amid anti-racism efforts |
| << < (126/352) > >> |
| magic:
--- Quote from: Zero999 on June 13, 2020, 07:28:02 pm ---I was waking along the street a few weeks ago and saw a group of black people walking towards me. I looked at them, then across the street and crossed the road, to avoid them. It would be perfectly understandable if they thought I was being raciest, especially as I'm white and was half-expecting a negative comment. In reality I was practising social distancing. I looked them to see if there was enough room to pass on the pavement, but it was too tight, then I looked at the road to check it was safe to cross and it was so I did. I would have done the same, had they been white, but admit I make more effort to socially distance from people of colour, because they're statistically more at risk at developing complications from COVID-19 and there's the small possibility I'm an a/presymptomatic carrier. --- End quote --- Hey man, I wanted to have mercy and give you a pass on that, but come on, not after this. --- Quote from: Zero999 on June 20, 2020, 05:58:05 pm ---superficial differences such as skin colour don't matter --- End quote --- This is a textbook example of unconscious bias. Do you know why the police are more likely to stop and search (or kill in attempted self defense) certain ethnicities over others? Not because they are racist dickheads who read 4chan in their spare time, but precisely because some statistician somewhere had said that those races are more likely to commit crime. Or, dunno, ever heard of the concept of "white flight"? Pretty much what you have done, in different circumstances. Truly liberal countries like Sweden at least made a good call and banned collection of any racial statistics whatsoever. If race doesn't exist than the risk of carrying corona can't be broken down by race. I can appreciate the honesty and integrity in that. But this is exactly it. America is racist because they have created a system where common sense is racist and where racism is common sense. And you understand it, but you refuse to acknowledge it because you don't want to be called racist. So much for the solidarity and "intermixing" that your stated political program demands from others. Remember that you don't have a monopoly on selfishness. edit Sorry, I misremembered your post and quoted it without re-reading the entirety of it :palm: Yes, you get a pass. But even if you aren't selfish, others are. The whole idea that racists care about nothing more than superficial factors like skin color is a strawman. Another part of "showing it to those racists" by ridiculing them, meh. |
| bd139:
Yes that. You’re more likely to be arrested here if you’re black. Same as you’re more likely to be arrested if you are male. I’m not in the street demanding that we arrest more women or stop arresting men. I’m busy not committing crimes. Statistics are important as it allows people to look at causality. And causality is roughly defined as a combination of poverty, poor education and some defective cultures in the U.K. All applies to all races as well for reference. A lot of people are given opportunities galore but do not take them and choose self destruction. What can we do? Carry on arresting them when they kick in a 75 year old in bulwell (check bbc news) But this is getting too political now I suspect. |
| G7PSK:
--- Quote from: magic on June 21, 2020, 07:27:13 am --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on June 13, 2020, 07:28:02 pm ---I was waking along the street a few weeks ago and saw a group of black people walking towards me. I looked at them, then across the street and crossed the road, to avoid them. It would be perfectly understandable if they thought I was being raciest, especially as I'm white and was half-expecting a negative comment. In reality I was practising social distancing. I looked them to see if there was enough room to pass on the pavement, but it was too tight, then I looked at the road to check it was safe to cross and it was so I did. I would have done the same, had they been white, but admit I make more effort to socially distance from people of colour, because they're statistically more at risk at developing complications from COVID-19 and there's the small possibility I'm an a/presymptomatic carrier. --- End quote --- Hey man, I wanted to have mercy and give you a pass on that, but come on, not after this. --- Quote from: Zero999 on June 20, 2020, 05:58:05 pm ---superficial differences such as skin colour don't matter --- End quote --- This is a textbook example of unconscious bias. Do you know why the police are more likely to stop and search (or kill in attempted self defense) certain ethnicities over others? Not because they are racist dickheads who read 4chan in their spare time, but precisely because some statistician somewhere had said that those races are more likely to commit crime. Or, dunno, ever heard of the concept of "white flight"? Pretty much what you have done, in different circumstances. Truly liberal countries like Sweden at least made a good call and banned collection of any racial statistics whatsoever. If race doesn't exist than the risk of carrying corona can't be broken down by race. I can appreciate the honesty and integrity in that. But this is exactly it. America is racist because they have created a system where common sense is racist and where racism is common sense. And you understand it, but you refuse to acknowledge it because you don't want to be called racist. So much for the solidarity and "intermixing" that your stated political program demands from others. Remember that you don't have a monopoly on selfishness. --- End quote --- There are areas in the UK where a single whit man would not dare to tread, parts of Luton come to mind alongside some estates in London,Manchester and Birmingham as well as many more towns. Because if they did so they would be attacked and beaten or the very least expelled from what is considered an all black or muslim area. No one dares to speak about this in the media anymore or in the Government but the police only go there in groups. |
| bd139:
Correct. This is the cultural issue I mention above. This is not racist either. You’ll find people of the same race equally disgusted about the situation. It’s cultural isolation. But if you criticise it you are branded a racist. That stifles debate and improvement and it escalated into places where people just don’t go. |
| Siwastaja:
--- Quote from: Nominal Animal on June 20, 2020, 10:38:15 pm ---or at least consider it not a bad idea because it placates people. --- End quote --- It's a good point. They think this way, but they are wrong. I'm sure most of the people seemingly agreeing with the violent groups or terrorists, as we are currently seeing, are doing this as they think showing "understanding" or even better, "agreement", leads to the radical groups becoming less radical; or if anything, at least they don't attack us if we show we are on their side. This is an unsurprising mechanism of self-preservation, and caused by fear, even if the people do not consciously see it. It's not the same, but somewhat similar to Stockholm syndrome. The only problem is, this does not work. It won't work because "they" obviously see through it. A recent example to show the point. In Finland, we have obviously seen the violent black supremacy borderline terrorist movement take action, as well, on a very small scale (and mostly ran by white people, actually the ones who just jump for every bandwagon that allows them to riot; this is nothing new), though. Here, the police proactively took an official stance that they support this violent movement; participated the demonstrations with signs showing the symbols of said violent movement, on work-time, wearing police uniforms. (As as side note, this is obviously against law; police is not allowed to take sides on demonstrations, even peaceful ones; even less are they allowed to promote violent movements. This incident resulted absolutely zero media discussion here, unsurprisingly, especially given the new media control implemented during the COVID.) Now, I think the reason the police decided to officially promote such anti-police violent movement, is to try to make them less violent against police; to show "we are on the same side": "do not attack us!" This is understandable and if it was an idea of the individual officers (we don't know yet), I don't blame them. The problem is, the violent movement also understands this. This was really well demonstrated, just a week after, as we saw a riot where the police, handling a routine case, were completely surrounded and attacked by a large mob of said violent anti-police group, and shot at using fireworks. As a result, some police officers were injured from the fireworks. Now, there is nothing surprising here, because the same is happening everywhere in the "West", but the comment a citizen journalist got from those (white) who fired the shots, right after the incident, was extremely revealing: "We must fight against crooked cops. Black lives matter." And I agree with them. Police saying that they support said violent anti-police movement, and waving their flags and symbols, is just crooked. The police is obviously just playing games. Hence, taking sides with terrorists does not protect the police; likely, the opposite happens: they will be only taken advantage of, then betrayed. "Kill the cops" won't go anywhere. Needless to say, here the police is notorious for very rarely using deadly force. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |